Long‐term effects of management practices on water‐driven soil erosion in an intense agricultural sub‐watershed: monitoring and modelling

Hydrological Processes - Tập 23 Số 19 - Trang 2818-2837 - 2009
O. Abaci1, A. N. Papanicolaou1
1IIHR—Hydroscience and Engineering, University of Iowa, 100 C. Maxwell Stanley Hydraulics Laboratory, Iowa City, IA, 52242, United States

Tóm tắt

AbstractThe overarching objective of this research was to provide an improved understanding of the role of land use and associated management practices on long‐term water‐driven soil erosion in small agricultural watersheds by coupling the established, physically based, distributed parameter Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) model with long‐term hydrologic, land use and soil data. A key step towards achieving this objective was the development of a detailed methodology for model calibration using physical ranges of key governing parameters such as effective hydraulic conductivity, critical hydraulic shear stress and rill/inter‐rill erodibilities. The physical ranges for these governing parameters were obtained based on in situ observations within the South Amana Sub‐Watershed (SASW) (∼26 km2) of the Clear Creek, IA watershed where detailed documentation of the different land uses was available for a period of nearly 100 years. A quasi validation of the calibrated model was conducted through long‐term field estimates of water and sediment discharge at the outlet of SASW and also by comparing the results with data reported in the literature for other Iowa watersheds exhibiting similar biogeochemical properties. Once WEPP was verified, ‘thought experiments’ were conducted to test our hypothesis that land use and associated management practices may be the major control of long‐term erosion in small agricultural watersheds such as SASW. Those experiments were performed using the dominant 2‐year crop rotations in the SASW, namely, fall till corn–no till bean (FTC‐NTB), no till bean–spring till corn (NTB‐STC) and no till corn–fall till bean (NTC‐FTB), which comprised approximately 90% of the total acreage in SASW. Results of this study showed that for all crop rotations, a strong correspondence existed between soil erosion rates and high‐magnitude precipitation events during the period of mid‐April and late July, as expected. The magnitude of this correspondence, however, was strongly affected by the crop rotation characteristics, such as canopy/residue cover provided by the crop, and the type and associated timing of tillage. Tillage type (i.e. primary and secondary tillages) affected the roughness of the soil surface and resulted in increases of the rill/inter‐rill erodibilities up to 35% and 300%, respectively. Particularly, the NTC‐FTB crop rotation, being the most intense land use in terms of tillage operations, caused the highest average annual erosion rate within the SASW, yielding quadrupled erosion rates comparatively to NTB‐STC. The impacts of tillage operation were further exacerbated by the timing of the operations in relation to precipitation events. Timing of operations affected the ‘life‐time’ of residue cover and as a result, the degree of protection that residue cover offers against the water action on the soil surface. In the case of NTC‐FTB crop rotation, dense corn residue stayed on the ground for only 40 days, whereas for the other two rotations, corn residue provided a protective layer for nearly 7 months, lessening thus the degree of soil erosion. The cumulative effects of tillage type and timing in conjunction with canopy/residue cover led to the conclusion that land management practices can significantly amplify or deamplify the impact of precipitation on long‐term soil erosion in small agricultural watersheds. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1016/S0022-1694(00)00156-6

10.1016/j.catena.2005.08.008

Alberts EE, 1995, USDA‐Water Erosion Prediction Project: Hillslope Profile and Watershed Model Documentation, NSERL Report No. 10, 47

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2007.00061.x

Arbeláez AC, 2007, AGU Hydrology Days, 198

10.13031/2013.21343

10.13031/2013.21344

10.1029/WS006p0331

10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2005)10:5(363)

Bhuyan SJ, 2002, Soil loss predictions with three erosion simulation models, Journal of Environmental Modeling and Software, 17, 137

10.1002/hyp.6669

10.13031/2013.15644

10.13031/2013.16110

Bouwer H, 1969, Infiltration of water into nonuniform soil, Journal of the Irrigation and Drainage Division, 95, 451, 10.1061/JRCEA4.0000669

Boyce RC, 1975, Present and Prospective Technology for Predicting Sediment Yields and Sources, 61

Brady NC, 2002, The Nature and Properties of Soils

10.13031/2013.31890

10.2136/sssaj2000.6441479x

Chow VT, 1988, Applied Hydrology

10.13031/2013.17953

Cruse RM, 2006, Daily estimates of rainfall, water runoff, and soil erosion in Iowa, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 61, 191

Dane JH, 1994, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Indirect Method for Estimation Hydraulic Properties of Unsaturated Soils, 389

Deer‐AscoughLA.1995.A framework for uncertainty analysis of complex process‐based models. PhD thesis Purdue University West Lafayette.

10.2136/sssaj2003.2080

DunS WuJQ ElliotWJ RobichaudPR.2006.Adapting the Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) model to forest conditions. Transactions of ASABE Paper No. 062150. St. Joseph MI: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2008.12.019

10.2136/sssaj1985.03615995004900020025x

10.1007/s11269-008-9390-1

ElliotWJ LiebenowAM LaflenJM KohlKD.1989.A compendium of soil erodibility data from WEPP cropland soil field erodibility experiments 1987 & 1988‐NSERL Report No. 3 Ohio State University and USDA‐ARS National Soil Erosion Research Laboratory.

10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(1986)112:1(39)

10.1080/02626669509491460

10.13031/2013.23968

FlanaganDC LivingstonSJ.1995.Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) User Summary–NSERL Report No.11 USDA‐ARS National Soil Erosion Research Laboratory West Lafayette IN.

FlanaganDC NearingMA.1995.Water Erosion Prediction Project: Hillslope profile and watershed model documentation—NSERL Report No.10 USDA‐ARS National Soil Erosion Research Laboratory West Lafayette IN.

10.13031/2013.2737

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2007.00087.x

10.1016/S0167-1987(02)00027-2

10.1016/0022-1694(93)90013-Y

Gilley JE, 2002, Managing runoff following manure application, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 57, 530

Gordon ND, 2004, Stream Hydrology: An Introduction for Ecologists

10.1016/S0167-1987(98)00117-2

HeadrickMG WilsonBN.1997.An evaluation of stochastic weather parameters for Minnesota and their impact on WEPP. ASAE Paper No. 972230.

10.1002/hyp.1168

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2004.tb04460.x

10.1029/2003JD003686

10.1175/1520-0450(1996)035<1878:SWSOAA>2.0.CO;2

10.1016/j.cageo.2005.03.017

10.1016/j.geomorph.2005.11.003

10.13031/2013.22643

10.2136/sssaj2005.0160

10.1080/02626668609491024

10.1016/j.still.2006.09.005

10.1016/j.earscirev.2006.08.001

10.1016/S0341-8162(00)00138-7

Laflen JM, 1991, WEPP: a new generation of erosion prediction technology, Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 46, 34

10.1016/j.still.2004.09.002

10.13031/2013.21345

10.1016/S1364-8152(03)00078-1

10.1016/j.still.2004.02.014

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.09.005

National Research Council, 2006, Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years

10.13031/2013.31409

10.13031/2013.31195

Nearing MA, 1994, Soil Erosion Research Methods, 127

10.1111/j.1752-1688.1996.tb03440.x

NeitschSL ArnoldJG KiniryJR SrinivasanR WilliamsJR.2002.Soil and water assessment tool user's manual: version 2000. GSWRL Report 02‐02 BRC Report 02–06 Publication Texas Water Resources Institute TR‐192 College Station TX.

Nicks AD, 1995, USDA‐Water Erosion Prediction Project: Hillslope Profile and Watershed Model Documentation, NSERL Report No. 10

10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2004)9:6(534)

10.1029/1998WR900104

Osawa K, 2005, River, Coastal and Estuarine Morphodynamics: RCEM2005, 1137

10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(2008)134:6(796)

10.1029/2006WR005763

Papanicolaou AN, 2008, Observations of soils at the hillslope scale in the Clear Creek Watershed in Iowa, USA, soil survey horizons, Soil Science Society of America Journal, 49, 83

10.2134/agronj2004.1372

PhillipsJV TadayonS.2006.Selection of Manning's roughness coefficient for natural and constructed vegetated and non‐vegetated channels and vegetation maintenance plan guidelines for vegetated channels in Central Arizona. USGS Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5108.

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.12.014

10.1890/1051-0761(2001)011[1194:NPPOUS]2.0.CO;2

Riggs HC, 1973, Hydrologic Analysis and Interpretation

10.1111/j.1752-1688.1995.tb03371.x

10.13031/2013.28092

10.1029/WR015i006p01409

Roehl JE, 1962, Sediment source areas and delivery ratios influencing morphological factors, International Association of Hydrological Sciences, 59, 202

10.13031/2013.16577

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2001.tb03630.x

10.1016/j.geoderma.2004.11.010

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2005.tb03740.x

Sorooshian S, 1995, Computer Models of Watershed Hydrology, 23

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2003.tb03691.x

10.13031/2013.15443

Syvitski JPM, 2005, River, Coastal and Estuarine Morphodynamics, 143

10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0699(2004)9:1(35)

TheregowdaR AbaciO PapanicolaouAN.2006.The use of sediment tracers in watershed processes World Environmental and Water Resources Congress 2006 Omaha NE.

10.13031/2013.28509

10.13031/2013.28065

10.13031/2013.3005

US Department of Agriculture–Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2007, National Resources Inventory 2003 Annual NRI

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2003.tb04395.x

Vieux BE, 2004, Distributed Hydrologic Modeling Using GIS

10.1016/0022-1694(83)90217-2

10.1016/0168-1923(94)02172-G

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2005.tb03786.x

10.1111/j.1752-1688.2001.tb00973.x

WischmeierWH.1966.Surface runoff in relation to physical and management factors. InProceedings of First Pan American Soil Conservation Congress San Paulo Brazil;237–244.

10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.01.030

WuJQ XuAC ElliotWJ.2002.Adapting WEPP (Water Erosion Prediction Project) for forest watershed erosion modeling. InProceedings of 12th ISCO Conference IV International Soil Conservation Organization;349–355.

10.1071/SR99104

10.13031/2013.12982

ZielinskiJ.2002.Watershed vulnerability analysis. Center for Watershed protection Ellicot City Maryland www.cwp.org/vulnerability_analysis.pdf.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Hydrological Processes

Tập 23 Số 19

2818-2837

Thông tin tác giả